Anno=
uncements: &=
nbsp; Katie
Townsend-Merino made the following announcements:

=
· =
The
Statewide Academic Senate has appointed Maria M=
iller
to be on their Counseling Advisory Committee and has also invited Ka=
tie
to be on the Relations with Local Senates Committee. She will be visiting s=
ome
of the other Senates in the area to facilitate discussions on how the State=
wide
Academic Senate can be supporting their efforts.

=
· =
Call
for nominations for the Statewide Academic Senate’s Exemplary Program
Award were recently distributed. A broader range of themes (e.g., transfer
centers, counseling programs, etc.) has been developed in order to enlarge =
the
pool of nominees. More information can be obtained by visiting the Statewide
Academic Senate’s website.

=
· =
Katie
referred to an article in last week’s North County Times regarding
Palomar’s current enrollment. Board member Michele Nelson was quoted =
in
the article as stating that “faculty members prefer to teach courses =
at
times that may not be the time of highest student demand.” She also
stated that, “how we treat these kids on the first few days is key, we
need to be careful not to intimidate them and make them feel terrified.R=
21;

<=
/span>

Katie stated that =
she intends
to respond to Dr. Nelson’s comments by submitting an editorial respon=
se
to the North County Times.In
addition, Katie is going to request a meeting with Dr. Nelson.It has been suggested by Council m=
embers
that another board and faculty member be invited to this meeting.Katie also reported that she has
requested enrollment data, which she intends to include in her response to =
Dr.
Nelson’s comments.

Senate members dis=
cussed
the article. When asked how Dr. Nelson came to be interviewed and why other
board members weren’t quoted in the article, Katie stated that she did
not know how the article came to be.

<=
/span>

=
· =
Monika
Brannick reported that the Tenure & Evaluations Review Board working gr=
oup
continues to meet on a regular basis. More detailed reports will be provide=
d in
the near future.

Bruce reported tha=
t IRC
develops the models, methodology, and processes by which all programs and s=
ervices
are reviewed on an annual basis to evaluate their efficiency, effectiveness,
and alignment with the Strategic Plan, Educational and Facilities Master Pl=
an
and those institution-wide plans to be developed in the future. The committ=
ee
develops specific criteria and procedures by which individual programs,
functions, and services are evaluated. It works with the appropriate staff =
to
develop criteria, gather data, and coordinate reviews for the planning
councils. The IRC is responsible for developing procedures, criteria, and t=
ools
relating to the evaluation of all District functions and activities.

=
o:p>

&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Due
to the recommendations by WASC, a new system is in place and the process of
institutional review will begin again in October. Bruce outlined the forms =
used
and suggested that several department members participate in the process ra=
ther
than assigning the task to one individual. He emphasized that the report is=
a
way to self-assess, look for things that need improving and justify with
suggestions/funds to fix the problem. This data will be useful to justify
increases if there are unallocated funds available at year-end and if recom=
mendations
are needed on how to spend.He
reported that the report was streamlined but that it is anticipated that it
will take approximately 20 hours to complete.

&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; A
question and answer period followed. There was a question on whether the
process occurred each year or was on a rotating basis, as well as the time
frame in completing the forms. Bruce reported that every department would
participate every year. Bonnie Dowd indicated that she would check her notes
from recent Strategic Planning Council meetings for clarification because s=
he
thought the proposal was for departments/units to rotate.

=

Bruce Gan added th=
at
four additional faculty members are needed to serve on the committee.

<=
/o:p>

Pres=
ident Deegan: &=
nbsp; Katie
Townsend-Merino provided the following report from her weekly meeting with
President Deegan:

=
· =
There
was additional discussion on the proposed Nursing expansion.

=
· =
The
North County Times article was discussed.

=
· =
Mr.
Deegan met with the President’s Associates to discuss ideas to support
faculty.

Stra=
tegic
Planning

Coun=
cil: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Katie
Townsend-Merino reported that Bonnie Dowd and Lori Waite have agreed to
participate in a sub-committee to distinguish between the concepts of Gover=
nance
versus Operational Committees. Members of the Strategic Planning Council al=
so
discussed the recent joint meeting of Instructional Planning and Student
Services Planning Councils and the decision-making process used to prioriti=
ze
faculty needs. Berta Cuaron a=
greed
that perhaps there should be more discussion with regard to the joint counc=
il
decision and voting process before faculty hiring prioritization continues.=
V.P.
Cuaron also asked that the Senate provide some recommendations.

<=
/span>

Reve=
nue
Allocation

Comm=
ittee: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Bonnie
Dowd reported that the Revenue Allocation Committee is scheduled to meet on
Tuesday, September 27. RAC passed a motion at its last meeting to have a
Co-Chair appointed by the committee members.This recommendation was made becau=
se
FSTF worked well using this format and to assist with the transition period=
that
will occur with a soon to be hired interim and then in January a permanent =
Vice
President of Finance. The appointment of a co-chair will occur at the next =
RAC meeting
and that recommendation will go to the Strategic Planning Council.

Palo=
mar
Faculty

Fede=
ration: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Julie
Ivey stated that a negotiation session is scheduled for Tuesday, September =
27.
She reported that she attended the CCC Conference and the CRT State Confere=
nce
this past weekend where many of the propositions on the upcoming ballot were
discussed, particularly Prop. 75.

Lear=
ning
Outcomes

Coun=
cil: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Barb
Kelber indicated that the Coordinating Committee continues to meet and is
working on a letter to chairs and to all full-time faculty members to begin
work on generating responses relating to learning outcomes.

Tech=
nology
Master

Plan=
Task
Force: &=
nbsp; Bonnie
Dowd reported that the Technology Master Plan Task Force has completed its
draft technology plan, which will be presented to President Deegan this Fri=
day.
It is anticipated that he will then forward the plan on to the Strategic
Planning Council, which will then sunshine it for input from the campus
community.

Motion
4 =
&=
nbsp; MSC
Dowd, Laughlin: Faculty Senate acceptance of the results of the ballot for =
the
following committee appointment:

&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Academic
Review Committee

&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Bruce
McDonough

Elections: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Katie
Townsend-Merino reported that no nominations were received for the Senate
vacancies and the nomination period has closed. Katie will be meeting with Stan Lev=
y,
Elections committee chair to discuss how to proceed.

Professional
Procedures

Committee: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Katie
Townsend-Merino indicated that the Professional Procedures Committee contin=
ues
to meet and has requested that the Senate postpone this item until they
complete their work. They will then bring their recommendations to the Sena=
te
for approval.

Mentor Program: &=
nbsp; Senate
members discussed the proposal to offer a mentor program for new faculty
members, with emphasis on the following issues:

=
&nb=
sp; =

=
o:p>

· =
Should
mentors be from the same department as the new faculty hire or are faculty
members from other departments more objective?

· =
A
“no fault” mentor review/appeal process which would allow the n=
ewly
hired faculty member an opportunity to be assigned a new mentor if the one
originally chosen isn’t working out.

· =
That
workshops and training are provided outside of their departments for those
faculty members interested in being mentors.

· =
That
the program be offered on a volunteer basis only.

Motion 6 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MSC
Dowd, Brannick: The Faculty Senate requests that the Professional Developme=
nt Coordinator
develop a faculty-to-faculty mentor program in consultation with the
Professional Development Review Board to be brought back to the Senate at a
later time.

<=
/span>

Academic Standards=
and

Practices Report o=
n the
uses

of F/FW/INC and the

=

Placement of the D=
rop

Date: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Teresa
Laughlin stated that the members of the Academic Standards and Practices
Committee have not had an opportunity to meet yet this semester and asked t=
hat
the item be postponed. She asked that faculty members with input on the use=
s of
F/FW/INC contact her so she can take those concerns to the committee for
discussion.

Hiring Issues: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Katie
Townsend-Merino reported that she met with several PFF members last Friday =
to
discuss some of the concerns expressed at last week’s Senate meeting =
on
the proposed nursing expansion.

=
&nb=
sp; =
Discuss=
ion
followed on the need to follow the current hiring process, as well as the n=
eed
for a clear understanding of exactly how many full-time and part-time Nursi=
ng
faculty will be needed. Because the top 15 proposed hires have already been
chosen, a determination must be made with regard to hiring full-time faculty
for Nursing and must also include consideration of the remaining 14 hire
requests that had not been included in the previously approved 15 hires for
next year. Senators agreed that it is clear that a Nursing Program expansio=
n is
needed, but there is also the issue of fairness among other departments who
have a need for additional full-time faculty. Also noted was the need for t=
he
Governing Board to follow established processes with regard to expanding
programs.

<=
/span>

=
&nb=
sp; =
It
was suggested that Katie work on a formal draft resolution that clearly sta=
tes the
Senate’s acknowledgement of the need to expand the Nursing program wh=
ile
also ensuring that the professorial aspects of the profession not be dimini=
shed
by expanding the program via Contract Education. This item will be brought =
back
for Senate action next week.

Hires
– Issues in Process:Sen=
ate
members discussed the voting process used to prioritize faculty hires during
the joint Instructional Planning Council (IPC) and Student Services Planning
Council (SSPC) meeting. Because there are recommendations for faculty hires
that come from IPC as well as recommendations for faculty hires from the
Student Services Planning Council (SSPC) for PE/Athletics and Counseling, t=
here
is concern with the process being both fair and productive. Mark Bealo repo=
rted
that these groups have scheduled another joint meeting to discuss how to
proceed.

=
p>

&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Katie
reported that she got the impression from V.P. Cuaron that there would not =
be
another joint council meeting due to some of the concerns addressed
previously.Senators ag=
reed
that the issue of how many full-time nursing faculty will be hired should be
resolved before the prioritization of the remaining 14 positions begins.

&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; It
was suggested that perhaps formulas could be used to assist in the decision=
-making
process, as well as the possibility of utilizing models that other campuses=
use
to ensure that the process is fair and equitable to all departments.